HARBANSLAL Vs. LABOUR COMMISSIONER PUNJAB CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the writ-petitioner has challenged the order, dated 20th June 1981, passed by the Labour Commissioner, Punjab. The impugned order reads as under : "i am directed to draw your attention to the above mentioned demand notice, dated 1 February 1984, and make it clear that the demand mentioned therein is not fit for being referred for adjudication because your case has not been proved". After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Madhya Pradesh Irrigation Karamchari Sangh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1985 II CLR 10. The only reason given by the Labour Commissioner declining the reference is that the demand is not fit for being referred for adjudication because the case of the petitioner has not been proved. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Irrigation Karamchari Sangh, (vide supra), the Labour Commissioner has no jurisdiction to decline the reference the ground that the case of the workman has not been proved. It is only for the Labour Court/industrial Tribunal to go into the matter after the same has been referred to it to decide as to whether the case of the workman has been proved or not. From this fact, it is clear that the Labour Commissioner exceeded the jurisdiction by taking decision that the case of the workman has not been proved because the Labour Commissioner is not adjudicator under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(2.) FOR the reasons recorded hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders, dated 20th June, 1981 (copy Annexure P1) and order, dated 18th February, 1985 (Annexure P-4), are quashed. The respondents are directed to refer the matter of the petitioner-workman for adjudication within two months from the date of this judgment. The parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.